Laparoscopic management of diverticular disease

Laparoscopic Hartmann Procedure—A Surgery That Still Saves Lives

Background: A Hartmann operation, which is the intervention by which the lower part of the sigmoid and the upper part of the rectum are resected with the closing of the rectal stump and end colostomy, has as its indications: advanced or complicated rectosigmoid neoplasm, moderate biological condition of the patient, peritoneal sepsis, intestinal occlusion and fragile colonic wall, especially in the context of inflammatory changes. The Hartmann procedure can save lives even at the cost of a stoma reversal failure. Methods: The cases operated with the Hartmann procedure by an open approach or laparoscopic approach in our clinic, between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2020, were admitted in this study and their medical records were reviewed, also making a comparison between the two types of approach. Univariate statistical comparisons but also a multivariate analysis was performed. Results: We performed 985 operations for intestinal and colonic occlusion (7.15% of the total operations in the clinic), 531 (54%) were non-tumor occlusions and 454 (46%) were occlusive tumors (88 Hartmann operations). Of these, 7.3% were laparoscopically performed (7 laparoscopic Hartmann operations and 23 diagnostic laparoscopies). A total of 11 cases (18%) also had colonic perforation. We compared laparoscopic Hartmann with open Hartmann and observed the benefits of laparoscopy for postoperative morbidity and mortality. The presence of pulmonary and cardiac morbidities is associated with the occurrence of general postoperative morbidities, while peritonitis is statistically significantly associated with the occurrence of local complications that are absent after the laparoscopic approach. Conclusions: The Hartmann procedure is still nowadays an operation widely used in emergency situations. Laparoscopy may become standard for the Hartmann procedure and reversal of the Hartmann procedure, but the percentage of laparoscopy remains low due to advanced or complicated colorectal cancer, poor general condition both at the first and second intervention, and the difficulties of reversal of the Hartmann procedure.

Acute Colonic Diverticulitis and Cirrhosis: Outcomes of Laparoscopic Colectomy Compared with an Open Approach

BACKGROUND

The impact of cirrhosis on outcomes of acute colonic diverticulitis (ACD) has been studied infrequently. We investigated the effect of cirrhosis on outcomes of surgical patients with ACD treated by either an open or laparoscopic approach.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was performed using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample 2012 to 2014. Patients with ACD were stratified into compensated and decompensated cirrhosis for comparisons of demographic characteristics, hospital length of stay, complications, mortality, and cost. Groups were stratified according to surgical treatment: open colectomy and laparoscopic colectomy. A comparative effectiveness analysis of outcomes was performed between the 2 surgical treatments. Univariate comparisons between groups and multivariate regression analysis were performed to identify risk factors for mortality and specific complications.

RESULTS

Of 1,172,875 patients hospitalized with the diagnosis of ACD during the study period, 1,145 were cirrhotic. The majority were male (59%). There were 660 compensated cirrhotic patients and 485 decompensated cirrhotic patients and all underwent either open (n = 875) or laparoscopic colectomy (n = 270). Consistently, marked increases in mortality, hospital length of stay, and cost were observed in decompensated cirrhotic patients regardless of the type of treatment. Laparoscopic colectomy was accompanied by shorter hospital length of stay, lower costs, and significantly decreased mortality rate compared with open colectomy in compensated and decompensated cirrhotic patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of cirrhosis markedly impacts outcomes in patients with ACD, leading to prolonged hospitalization, higher cost, and increased complications and deaths. Laparoscopic colectomy is associated with better outcomes in patients requiring surgical management, including those with decompensated cirrhosis.

Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Approach in Colon Surgery

BACKGROUND

This study sought to compare outcomes of patients who underwent hand-assisted laparoscopic (HAL) colectomy with open and laparoscopic colectomy (LP).

STUDY DESIGN

The NSQIP databases were used to examine the clinical data of patients who underwent elective colectomy during 2012-2013. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to compare the three surgical approaches.

RESULTS

We sampled a total of 21,090 patients who underwent colectomy. Of these, 7480 (35.5 %) had open colectomy (OC), 8751 (41.5 %) had a laparoscopic colectomy, 2860 (13.6 %) had a HAL colectomy, and 1999 (9.5 %) had an open procedure converted from LC or HAL. Multivariate regression analysis revealed HAL colectomy had a similar mortality (AOR 0.53, P = 0.07) and a lower morbidity (AOR 0.37, P < 0.01) compared to OC. LC had lower mortality (AOR 0.58, P = 0.02) and morbidity (AOR 0.43, P < 0.01) compared to OC. Mortality of patients who underwent HAL was not significantly different from LC (AOR 0.90, P = 0.79); however, morbidity of such patients was significantly higher than for patients who underwent LC (AOR 1.29, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

HAL colectomy is a safe approach with significant advantages compared to open colectomy. Although the morbidity of patients who underwent HAL is higher than patients who underwent LC, the morbidity rate is still lower than OC.

Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Approach in Colon Surgery

BACKGROUND

This study sought to compare outcomes of patients who underwent hand-assisted laparoscopic (HAL) colectomy with open and laparoscopic colectomy (LP).

STUDY DESIGN

The NSQIP databases were used to examine the clinical data of patients who underwent elective colectomy during 2012-2013. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to compare the three surgical approaches.

RESULTS

We sampled a total of 21,090 patients who underwent colectomy. Of these, 7480 (35.5 %) had open colectomy (OC), 8751 (41.5 %) had a laparoscopic colectomy, 2860 (13.6 %) had a HAL colectomy, and 1999 (9.5 %) had an open procedure converted from LC or HAL. Multivariate regression analysis revealed HAL colectomy had a similar mortality (AOR 0.53, P = 0.07) and a lower morbidity (AOR 0.37, P < 0.01) compared to OC. LC had lower mortality (AOR 0.58, P = 0.02) and morbidity (AOR 0.43, P < 0.01) compared to OC. Mortality of patients who underwent HAL was not significantly different from LC (AOR 0.90, P = 0.79); however, morbidity of such patients was significantly higher than for patients who underwent LC (AOR 1.29, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

HAL colectomy is a safe approach with significant advantages compared to open colectomy. Although the morbidity of patients who underwent HAL is higher than patients who underwent LC, the morbidity rate is still lower than OC.

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery for diverticular disease is not suitable for the early part of the learning curve. A retrospective cohort study

AIM

We evaluate the challenges of laparoscopic colorectal surgery for diverticular disease.

METHODS

Retrospective study of elective laparoscopic colorectal procedures (LCP) performed 2002-2011. The study compares LCP for Diverticular disease (S group) with both LCP for other pathology (C1 group) and open procedures for diverticular disease (C2 group). Statistical analysis was performed using Fisher's exact test, Student "t" test and Mann Whitney U-test.

RESULTS

The study included 194 LCP out of which 22 were in S group. Conversion rate in S group was 27.3% vs 9.9% in C1 group, p = 0.017. The mean operating time was significantly higher in S group (250 min) compared with 196 min in C1 group, p = 0.0004. The median length of hospital stay was 6 days in S group and 4 days in C group, p = 0.12. Both morbidities and mortality rates were not statistically different between the two groups. In the second part of the study we compare LCP with OCP performed for diverticular disease.

CONCLUSION

LCP for Diverticular disease are technically challenging and should be attempted later in the learning curve.